By the middle of the fifth century the light of the gospel was eclipsed in the darkness of Romanism. During this century the papacy secured political recognition of its claims to direct jurisdiction over all churches. This occurred during the pontificate of Leo I, who, because of his success in furthering the interests of the popedom, shares alone with Pope Gregory the title of "the Great." To quote from the New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, Leo "entered upon a pontificate which was to be epoch-making for the centralization of the government of the church." Political causes combined to advance the claims of the papacy to universal recognition. Attila, with his fierce barbarians, invaded Italy and laid waste many of her fairest provinces and then advanced boldly on Rome, whereupon Pope Leo went out to the camp of the invaders and secured the evacuation of Italy. The pope obtained the full support of Valentinian III. In 445 Leo enforced authority in the distant patriarchate of Alexandria. In 444-446 he was in conflict with the Illyrian bishops. During this time in a letter addressed to them he laid down the principle that St. Peter had received the primacy and oversight of the whole church and that hence all important matters must be referred to and decided by Rome. He also proceeded to extend his authority over Gaul. In this effort he obtained from Valentinian III the famous decree of June 6, 445, which "recognized the primacy of the Pope of Rome based on the merits of Peter, the dignity of the city, and the decrees of Nice (in their interpolated form); ordained that any opposition to this rulings, which were to have the force of law, should be treated as treason; and provided for the forcible extradition by provincial governors of any one who refused to answer a summons to Rome."

The apostle John was banished to the Isle of Patmos in 95. Regarding that date as the close of the pure apostolic era, and 445, when the pope received from the emperor of the West official recognition of his claims to universal supremacy in the church, as representing one other extreme, we have but to calculate the time half way between these extremes to find the consistent starting-stake for the beginning of that time prophecy which is to measure both lines of prophetic truth. From 95 to 445 is a period of 350 years. Half of this period is 175 years. Therefore 175 years after 95, or 270, is the correct starting-point.

Protestant church historians recognize the decline that came in the early church. Many of them, as D'Aubigne, Marsh, Rutter, Waddington, and others, point to the third century, or the latter half of the third century, as marking an unusual epoch in this declension. Others, however, who view things almost wholly from the external point of view, regard the accession of Constantine in the early part of the following century as marking the important epoch. With reference to this subject, I quote Joseph Milner, the English ecclesiastical historian: "I know it is common for authors to represent the declension of Christianity to have taken place only after its external establishment under Constantine. But the events of history have compelled me to dissent from this view of things."—Ch. Hist., Cent. IV, Chap. I.

It is also evident from the facts of history that, in addition to the corruption of evangelical faith, that other phase of the apostasy—human ecclesiasticism—was also highly developed before the end of the third century. George P. Fisher says, "The accession of Constantine [A.D. 312] found the church so firmly organized under the hierarchy that it could not lose its identity by being absolutely merged in the state."—History of the Christian Church, p. 99.

In the year A.D. 270 Anthony, an Egyptian, the father of monasticism, fixed his abode in the deserts of Egypt and formed monks into organized bodies. Dowling, describing the extravagance of monkery and the false standard of piety and holiness it created, declares that monkery "actually affected the church universal." See History of Romanism, pp. 88, 89. Very few marks of genuine piety remained. With the decline of evangelical knowledge came a reign of superstition and ignorance. Milner, adverting to the institution of monkery in the third century, expresses his "regret that the faith and love of the gospel received toward the close of it a dreadful blow from the encouragement of this unchristian practise."—Century III, Chap. XX.

In another place the same historian, speaking of the absence of truth and the prevalence of error in the third century, says: "It is vain to expect Christian faith to abound without Christian doctrine. Moral and philosophical and monastical instructions will not effect for men what is to be expected from evangelical doctrine. And if the faith of Christ was so much declined (and its decayed state ought to be dated from about the year 270,) we need not wonder that such scenes as Eusebius hints at without any circumstantial details, took place in the Christian world."—Century IV, Chap. I. (Parenthetical clause is Milner's; italicizing, mine.) In addition to this quotation, and as if to give emphasis, the historian places prominently in a side-head the words, "Decay of pure Christianity, A.D. 270."

Measuring forward from A.D. 270 the alloted period of twelve hundred and sixty years brings us to A.D. 1530, a year which marked the beginning of Protestantism in its organized form. The first Protestant creed, the Confession of Augsburg, was made that year.

The description of the papal power under the symbol of the ten-horned beast of Revelation 13 and the little horn of Daniel 7 presents a melancholy picture of world-events during the long period of twelve hundred and sixty years ending with the sixteenth century reformation.

Principle of parallelism

Before proceeding to give in chronological order a description of events following the reign of the beast, I wish to call attention to an important plan followed in the Biblical presentation of prophetic truth; namely, that the events are taken up by parallel series covering the same period of time. But in addition to this point, we observe the principle of contrast. When the history of political events is described, we have in contrast therewith a description of ecclesiastical events; and with the representation of a false church or an apostate state of Christianity, we have in immediate contrast the history of God's chosen people. Or perhaps the order is reversed, but the principle remains the same. While, in the nature of things, these distinct lines can not always be well represented symbolically as occurring at the same time, they are presented in parallel series, thus proving that they were to be fulfilled simultaneously.